Barnes v. Yahoo!, Inc.

2009),[1] is a United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit case in which the Ninth Circuit held that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) rules that Yahoo!, Inc., as an Internet service provider cannot be held responsible for failure to remove objectionable content posted to their website by a third party.

As a result of her ex-boyfriend's actions, Barnes started getting phone calls, emails, and even office visits from various men who expected to have sex with her.

She sent them a copy of her photo ID and a signed statement explaining that she did not create those profiles and requesting their removal.

[2] Yahoo!, Inc. relied exclusively on the first part of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which bars courts from treating certain internet service providers as publishers or speakers.

"[4] Section 230(c) of the CDA: Protection for "good samaritan" blocking and screening of offensive material[5] (1) Treatment of publisher or speaker — No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.Barnes tried to make a claim that she was not holding Yahoo!

[4] Section 323 of Oregon Torts Claim[4] One who undertakes, gratuitously or for consideration, to render services to another which he should recognize as necessary for the protection of the other's person or things, is subject to liability to the other for physical harm resulting from his failure to exercise reasonable care to perform his undertaking...Plaintiff alleged that when Yahoo!

contacted her, she relied on its affirmative duty to remove the profiles and prohibited them from being posted again like the defendant promised.

failed to do this, Barnes alleged that the defendant did not "exercise reasonable care to perform his undertaking" and that she was harmed by the third-party content.

[4] Plaintiff's claims fell under Section 230 of the CDA which grants broad immunity from liability to Internet service providers, which Yahoo!

According to the Court, "Any such claim by plaintiff necessarily treats the service provider as 'publisher' of the content is therefore barred by Sec.

[1] The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the ruling that an Internet service provider is immune from removing indecent content from their website on the basis of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.